Quantcast
Home | Back

Teachers back cigarette tax

Share Story:     Share_email E-mail Story    |    Share_print Print Story    |    Comments    |   

Kentucky Education Association supports a cigarette tax increase, a reform of tax code and the Let Kentuckians Vote initiative on expanded gaming.

KEA President Sharron Oxendine announced the endorsements during a press conference Friday at Second Street School.

Oxendine said in a press release the cigarette tax would provide Kentucky with more than $300 million annually. Gov. Steve Beshear announced Thursday he favors a 70-cent increase, bringing the state tax to $1 a pack.

"We're going to be pushing really hard to make sure those increases go through," Oxendine said at the conference. "We are so desperate for school funding. We'll take anything at this time."

Frankfort Independent Schools Superintendent Dianne Cobb agreed.

"I'm for anything that's going to help us avoid cuts in education," Cobb said. "We can't keep enjoying benefits unless we pay for them."

Franklin County Schools Superintendent Harrie Lynne Buecker said she would support the tax as well if it helps funding for schools.

"We know the budget for schools is dismal. If the tax will help get the funds we need, I support that," said Buecker.

Frankfort High/Middle School Principal Rita Rector said the cigarette tax increase is preferable to budget cuts.

"I would much rather see something like (the cigarette tax) bring revenue into the state and go into education to help us," Rector said.

Oxendine said KEA does not support or oppose the extended gaming amendment; it just wants the issue on the ballot.

"We want Kentuckians to vote on it," Oxendine said. "If it's voted down, let's look at some other alternatives. If it's voted up, let's see how it can help fund education."

Buecker agreed the people of Kentucky should get the chance to vote on gaming.
"I think it's nice to give everyone in the commonwealth a voice on that," Buecker said.

Oxendine toured Kentucky last week, visiting schools as part of the Read Across America program, a program that encourages literacy.

Oxendine became emotional as she discussed experiences from her tour of the state.

"This has been a hard week," she said.

Oxendine said she was at Second Street School Monday and overheard a teacher ask a colleague how the roof held up after a hard rain the previous night.

"It struck me, that shouldn't be something we have to worry about," Oxendine said as she fought back tears.

She also shared her experience at Fourth Street School in Newport, where almost 90 percent of students are enrolled in the assisted lunch program. KEA donated books to every child enrolled in the school.

Fourth Street Principal Douglas Alpiger said the donation had a big impact on the students.

"Mouths open, eyes wide," was how Alpiger described the students. "It's a joy to see kids with (books) in their hands."

"Anything we can do to make the situation better for them, students, teachers, staff, principals, that's what it's all about," Oxendine said.




Comments
By Posting to this site, you agree to our Terms of Service Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed. State-Journal.com doesn't necessarily condone the comments here, nor does it review every post.

Login above or Register to comment.
Jump to Page: 1 2
   Next 10 Comments of 13 Total Comments
13.
    Posted by sickofreadingcrapcomments March 14, 2008
A quick further note- see article "Superintendent says cigarette tax good for schools" to see where teacher's really want that cigareete tax money to go. If there aren't "books in the hands" of students then why don't these teacher associations let the money go to that instead of lobbying the legistlature for pay and benefit increases. For you liberal, pansies(I can already hear you whining about their deplorable pay) My SOLUTION would ease the woes of teachers, too, leaving more of their money in their own pockets.

12.
    Posted by sickofreadingcrapcomments March 14, 2008
The SOLUTION is for government to let people- rich or poor keep more of the money that they earn so that they have an incentive to work harder to give their kids more or spend more time with them. And if their parents are working at all they don't qualify for all of these programs- I know because I was once faced with the decision of whether or not to take govt. assistance. An older and wiser freind told me not to, that once people got on it they never get off. I put it off for a year and when I did go to see about it, I was told confidentially that I made too much money and in order to qualify I would have to quit my minimum wage job! I was really bad off and wouldn't have been much better on assistance.I didn't quit my job, and later on I made it. I paid more in taxes last year than the governor did. I seriously worry about a society that makes it easier and easier, not to try and to take assistance that nobody can live well on. Where is the incentive? Where would I and my daughter have been if I had taken a different road? Maybe in a neighborhood like the one where the drug shooting took place the other day.

No I can't blame children for being born into poverty, but I don't think we are doing anybody any favors by giving them a legacy of living like crap on govt. assistance for generations. And it certainly isn't right for me to pay for it at the expence of my family who had enough sense to do better. These kids are getting better healthcare than mine is. I can't afford it even at my income level, because I am paying for theirs!

People need incentive to do better. Whatever economic level you are at.

If the basics of life are just given to you, and govt. divides up the wealth (via taxes) in order to do so- then no GEORGE, you idealistic, cotton headed ninny muggin- it is not America, it is a whole other breed of govt. America is where you work hard and reap the rewards of it YOURSELF. Others see you and want it too and sometimes have to struggle for a while and get creative in order to find it. But they can and they do it because there is an incentive, they NEED and want it. Then when they get a little they employ others and help people through charity, more willingly to the extent that they can and also maintain what they have going for themselves. This taxing the "wealthy" crap and giving it away subverts the whole process. My family does not give to charitable causes, because we already are and it is hurting us.

11.
    Posted by sickofreadingcrapcomments March 14, 2008
What would be good for our schools is for teachers to do a better job for the great salaries that they are already getting, and do it with a better attitude toward parents and children. Then maybe they would deserve a raise. Why in the heck are we supposed to beleive that higher pay is going to equal teachers doing a better job teaching anyway? It doesn't take a bunch of "data" and technology to teach a kid to read and do math at a reasonable level, and they haven't figured out how to do that well in this state yet.

More taxes are never better for families who pay them, and that affects kids, too. Their parents haven't gotten the kind of raise that teachers get year after year. We are in a recession for God's sake, families are loseing their homes, can we quit with the higher taxes already!

For the record, I am not a smoker, but at this point any tax hike is bad. The government already gets at least half of what we make when you consider all the hidden taxes like sales, library and all that Al Gore stuff on our phone bills. And if government is going to just give it all away then what incentive do the "less fortunate" have to do better or the rest of us have to work at all!
It's time for government to learn to live within it's means like the rest of us have to, especially in this economy. Teachers, too.

10.
    Posted by terrell1963 March 12, 2008
The problem is a lack of responsibility and common sense.

Maybe if George had finished school he may have learned this country was built by people who lived by the sweat of their own brow and not off of their neighbors work.

If people are dumb enough to have children when they can barely afford to take care of themselves, they shouldn't be having them. It's so simple, it's stupid.

Forced taking of money from one individual (taxes)to give to another (entitlement programs - welfare, medicare, medicaid) is called wealth redistribution and is a cornerstone of socialism.

The United States is a Constitutional Republic and not a socialist state. If you want socialism, try China or Cuba.

And as far as the ignorant argument that if they are working a 2nd or 3rd job their kids will be criminals - what excuse do you have for the "parents" who are on welfare, etc who let their animals run the streets? Our government wastes billions each year in entitlement programs and the crime rate doesn't go down.

George - I apologize for trying to use terms that are less crass than your myopic mind can handle. Let me dummy it down to your level for you - you are a poopyhead. There, feel better? I knew you would. . . .

9.
    Posted by ibdeb March 11, 2008
What about the parents that COULD afford to have children when they had them, but have since become victims of the slowing economy and have been laid off? What does every suggest then? Those folks are often told they are "over qualified" for many positions, and they sure didn't plan on needing any assistance. I think everyone is so quick to judge instead of finding out the situations of the individual.

8.
    Posted by The Citizen March 11, 2008
George makes a very good point.
People are quick to point the finger at parents who work 2nd and 3rd jobs to provide for their families when the child acts out for the attention they lack while their parent is out earning barely enough to make ends meet.

So what is your solution terrell1963? You clearly THINK you have all of the answers.

If you have no suggestions as to better the situation, I suggest you keep your mouth shut, or in this case, your fingers off the keyboard.

7.
    Posted by George Washington March 10, 2008
Okay, it is obvious that terrel thinks he is from England. We don't call people twits in America. In the good ole USA, we use such phrases as "go away" or "get out of here," but seriously, go bugger off? I mean, did you put down your tea and crumpets before you typed it? As for twit, it just isn't a very American insult. We like insults such as "nincompoop" or "jerk" or "cotton headed ninny muggins."

Terrel, you need to just get out, because this is America, and we like Mountain Dew, Nascar, 50 dollar bills, and babies in America!!

Just as soon as those parents get a 2nd or 3rd job then those kids are going to grow up and rob you when their parents aren't around. You're dumber than I, and I only went to school until I was 11. The social costs of this situation are far more complex than you make them out to be.

6.
    Posted by ema March 10, 2008
So you think the babies could handle two or three jobs?

5.
    Posted by terrell1963 March 10, 2008
Hey George,

It is a more polite term than the American version you twit.

As for the "community" idea, you are natural born socialists. It is not my responsibility to pay for someone else's mistakes. Let them get a 2nd or 3rd job to pay for it.

Maybe if society held these morons responsible, they'd get the hint and act more responsible. They won't as long as the community will coddle them and the other pimps, whores and welfare brats.

4.
    Posted by ema March 10, 2008
I agree w/Citizen. The children did not ask to be here and I don't think they should have to go hungry because their parents make irresponsible decisions.

   Next 10 Comments | Home | Back